OT – The story of Tamar. We have read of her before. In Matthew’s genealogy, Tamar is one of the women listed. Her son Perez is one of Joseph’s, Mary’s husband, ancestors.
When I read this story, I don’t know whether to be proud of her for scheming and pursuing her plans or to be disgusted at Judah’s casual dismissal of her – he just didn’t want to be a laughingstock. But I would like to know how he KNEW the babies were his. I get that he had sex with her. But if she was a shrine prostitute (at least in his eyes), how did he know that he was the father since presumably she had sex with lots of men? Oh, the things the Bible does not explain!!!
NT – I thought I would list some of the names that Matthew calls Jesus. Today, it was Son of David. Previously, Lord of the Sabbath, Son of Man, the Son, A Prophet, Christ, Lord, Teacher, Son of God, Jesus, Immanuael, God with us. And we are only on chapter 12! When I look back at this list, it occurred to me that even the writer of Matthew wasn’t exactly sure who or what Jesus was/is. Oh, I think he had descriptors and stories and sayings. And thank goodness, he wrote them down for us to have as yesterday’s proverb said “like an ornament around the neck”. (Just as aside, I think of all the women I know who wear beautiful crosses around their necks. That is their talisman. Their reminder of the Wisdom in their world. At least, I hope it is…) I think if I had to guess, the writer of Matthew was really trying to coalesce his thoughts which is why we get so many, many names.
In today’s Matthew reading, Jesus goes to great lengths to determine logically that he simply cannot be from Satan that he must be from God. He does this by a series of images. By far, my favorite one is the swept clean house that is unoccupied. In an NPR story about keeping resolutions, the doctor they interviewed was the doctor appointed by Nixon to figure out how to get the returning soldiers from Vietnam off of heroin and to stay off. He has been researching behavioral changes ever since. His comment about the best way to change your behavior is to ‘interrupt the sequence’. You have to change the environment in order to accomplish your goal. Listen to the 5 min podcast here.
In Jesus’ analogy, it is not enough to have swept the house clean of demons. You have to fill it with angels.
In my own little world, I find that to be so true. My Weight Watchers leader, Jan, once had us write 10 things down that we love to do that do not involve eating but take 5-10 minutes. We cut them into slivers and put them in an envelope. She then asked us when we started down that path to bingedom, pull out the envelope, reach in and do one of those things. It is amazing how that can break the pantry sweep that I can do.
Thinking of your demons, what is it that is not of the angels? Do you gossip? Exaggerate, lie? It isn’t enough to merely not do that. You have to fill your mouth with positive things, true things, accurate things. And it takes practice. Just ask me. Back at Weight Watchers trying to lose the same 30 pounds.
Will carry this with me throughout the day [and hopefully beyond that!] I usually have the best of intentions, but the trick is in the actual doing. Loved the envelope exercise.
ReplyDeleteI wonder why the story of Tamar is stuck right in the middle of the story of Joseph. Why wasn't it the Chapter before or after the story of Joseph? A strange little story and one that I don't even why it was included in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI hope that I haven't blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. Reading Jesus' words about how they will not forgiven are a little scary.
Neat idea from the Weight Watchers leader!
Here are 4 additional sources about the Tamar story.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.womeninthebible.net/1.5.Tamar_and_Judah.htm
http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/tamar-bible
http://www.biblicalheritage.org/DTB/0508%20DTB05%20Tamar.pdf
http://www.theropps.com/papers/Winter1997/Genesis38exegesis.htm
I found one yesterday that I cannot find today that discussed why the story is where it is.
The Book of Genesis is thought to have 3 possibly 4 different story tellers. You can tell the different strains by how they use the name for God. The Tamar story is from the Yahweist strain. This strain carries through all the way to the Ruth and portions of the David story.
http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/Genesis_texts.html
The Joseph story is from the Elohim authorship.
At any rate, the story of Tamar seems to be just thrust into the section between the Joseph story. However, I think there is something much larger going on. It is like this is the backstory for Judah. To explain why he, of all the sons of Jacob got to be the ancestor of David. It is almost a redemption story. He was clearly the best of the other boys since he intended to rescue Joseph. Even that phrase “left his brothers” (not his father, not his mother, his BROTHERS), makes me think that he was disgusted with them and himself for the treatment of Joseph.
Assuming that you had to explain why Judah, just merely okay, got to be the ancestor, (instead of, for example, the sons of Joseph or Benjamin) you really had to show how complicated his life was. Alone in a foreign place, 3 sons by a foreign woman, sons marrying but having no offspring, he was really in a bad situation. Was it grief for his dead wife that sent him to the prostitute? Or just having had a really good time off with the lifestock at the shearing festival -- code I think for a guys’ convention with lots of booze and easy women. Okay, so he was a little indiscreet but he did try to pay up.
Later on in the Joseph story, we see just how good Judah has turned out to be when he repeatedly volunteers to remain in Benjamin’s stead rather than return home minus the second O Favored One.
Clearly, the story of Tamar is puzzling to us in the 21st century. I think there is so much we don’t understand about their customs and ideas that are just casually mentioned. Maybe the best we can hope for is to learn some lesson from the players involved.
I don't know that Jonah gets the redemptive arc here.
ReplyDeleteReuben was the first one to jump in and try to keep his brothers in check, not Judah.
21 When Reuben heard this, he tried to rescue him from their hands. “Let’s not take his life,” he said. 22 “Don’t shed any blood. Throw him into this cistern here in the wilderness, but don’t lay a hand on him.” Reuben said this to rescue him from them and take him back to his father.
Judah was the one who hatched the scheme to sell him off and save all their hides.
Judah said to his brothers, “What will we gain if we kill our brother and cover up his blood? 27 Come, let’s sell him to the Ishmaelites and not lay our hands on him; after all, he is our brother, our own flesh and blood.” His brothers agreed.
Only Reuben seemed genuinely distraught over the apparent fate of Joseph
29 When Reuben returned to the cistern and saw that Joseph was not there, he tore his clothes. 30 He went back to his brothers and said, “The boy isn’t there! Where can I turn now?”
I don't know. Maybe Jonah thought that the only way to keep Joseph safe was to take him completely out of the picture.
If Joseph had been returned, via Reuben's plan, the sibling rivalry simply would have continued along it's murderous route.
Just more to ponder.
Oops! Thanks Lisa. You are absolutely correct.
ReplyDelete